Skip to main content

About your Search

20121129
20121207
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
to congress. january 1, 2013, new tax rates and rolls kick in. january 2, 2013, $110 billion in fiscal cliff spending cuts due to begin. march 27, 2013, funding of the federal government expires. august 1, 2013, white house's suggested deadline for resolving major changes to the tax code and entitlements. ron has this to say about the fiscal cliff -- let's hear from ray in philadelphia, a republican caller. caller: good morning. i think the republicans have to get out a better message. if we realize we ran out of money for all the programs we are having, what is going to happen in another 10 years? what happens is, these people earning more than $250,000, they worked from the age of 18 to move up the ladder and finally reached success. the pint the republicans have to make is it is time to lower taxes on middle-class families. it has reached a pinnacle. it is time to may be lower taxes on the middle-class. we have to cut spending because the economy is in such bad positicondition. democrats keep pointing out that 98% of businesses are less than $250,000. 98% of people working in those busine
a fiscal cliff. at that rate, talks are going slow. the u.s. seems poised to go over the edge. wendell goler live at the white house. okay, does everyone have like the calendar in front of them realizing what the date actually is? >> it's a high stakes poker game. each side waiting for the other to show its cards. the white house demanding republicans say how much they're willing to raise taxes and republicans demanding the white house list the spending cuts. democrats are willing to accept. there is, as you say, less than month before the deadline and realistically, there may be less time than that given the need for congress to actually write legislation. house speaker john boehner said on fox news sunday, right now they've got nothing to start with. >> i would say we're nowhere, period. we're nowhere. we've put a serious offer on the table by putting revenues up there to try to get this question resolved. but the white house has responded with virtually nothing. they've actually asked for more revenue than they've been asking for the whole entire time. >> the president campaigned on
, go down the fiscal cliff for tax rates, and adjust the taxes for the 98% through the rebate process. and this could be available for anyone, any president. let the bush tax rates apply as a ceiling, and then apply the rebate process to control the 98%. host: why do you propose that? what is the advantage in your view? caller: because the executive branch, the president, whoever it is, would have the ability to adjust the tax effectively for anyone who falls below the clintons' ceiling, and they could do this anytime. there would not have to go back to congress. -- they would not have to go back to congress. guest: it is true that technically the administration can do some things without even the congress's approval, but it would not be a lasting solution. let's say you could freeze the amount of withholding that you pay three paycheck at the level it was this year, for the 98%, and increase withholdings for everyone else as the law would dictate if you read over the cliff. -- went over the cliff. but the 98%, if they did not actually pass a law to extend the tax cuts for that portio
of going over the fiscal cliff or extending the lower tax rate and at the upper one, which would you choose? >> i will do everything i can to avoid putting the american economy and the american people through the fiasco of going over the fiscal cliff. [indiscernible] >> as i told the president a couple of weeks ago, there are a lot of things i have wanted in my life, but almost all of them had a price tag attached to them. if we're going to talk about the debt limit in this, there will be some price tag associated with it. >> are you standing by the dollar-for-dollar on spending cuts? >> i continue to believe that any increase on the debt limit has to be accompanied with spending reductions that meet or exceed it. or exceed it. >> thursday house minority leader nancy pelosi democrats are prepared to vote for middle class tax cuts for 98% of americans. these remarks came after democratic leaders came -- met. >> this doesn't have to be a cliff hanger. the president has his pen poised to sign a middle income tax cut. it has passed the senate and house democrats are prepared to vote for it. we
there will be no deal on the fiscal cliff unless both sides agree to raise rates on the wealthiest. that means raise tax rates for top earners. the reason that this is news is because there's been discussion publicly that perhaps they could find a rev new agreement where it would just involve capping deductions or maybe they could get to revenue just through tax reform, and with this piece of detail from that phone call yesterday, it would seem that the democrats, the president personally, is drawing a line saying those other ways are not enough. his campaign message that the top earners have to pay more, he is sticking to that line many these negotiations. >> jess, do we know how the republicans responded to this red line? >> well, speaker boehner was frustrated, wrovl, and came out with -- in his press conference today basically accusing the president of not leading on the issue. both sides are calling for the white house to come forward with spending cuts first, tell us where you are going to cut spending, before we, the republicans, will say whether we'll go along with you on tax rates. >> okay. the
clinton-era rates, we are going to go off the fiscal cliff. >> you know, it's interesting, ari, you'll remember this because you were the white house press secretary in 2001 and 2003 when those bush-era tax rates were approved basically by republicans, very few democrats voted to approve those bush-era tax cuts. so why not do what the republican congressman from oklahoma says, what paul just said, go ahead, declare victory. say, look, all these democrats are now on board, they support for 98% of the american people the bush-era tax rates for a long time to come, declare victory and move on. >> well, number one, wolf, actually those tax cuts were bipartisan. 12 senators -- democratic senators voted for them, a good number. more than 60 senators voted for the bush tax cuts across the board. number two, let me surprise you with this, i don't agree by going over the fiscal cliff, but i do agree that the smart move for the americans to make they don't have leverage on the taxes. the payroll tax cut about to expire and it did expire, republicans tucked their tails, reversed themselves und
the fiscal cliff. i disagree. i think he does. i think he wants all the tax rates to go up. you can argue the politics of this. he needs revenue to come in. he wants more spending, not less. wants 1.2 trillion dollars in defense cuts because he wants to cut the military and wants an unlimited credit card in terms being allowed unilaterally to raise the debt limit. he wants all of these things and he knows he will not get blamed for it. the republicans will get blamed for it no matter what happens. the gop will get blamed for it because the mia is protective the president. he has nothing to lose, jon. he is willing to go over the cliff. >> i think what he is say take us over the cliff and vote with the democrats and dare republicans not vote it for 90% of the americans wouldn't be affected by top two tax rates. politician long last realistic how to negotiate in washington he finally understands what you need to do is come and say this is my position. republicans give us your position and we'll negotiate that way as opposed to coming to the table, john boehner i give you 50% of what you wan
the fiscal cliff, which could make it even worse. so we need to do all we can to ensure that our workers and our farmers have access to the 95% of consumers who live outside of our borders. that adds jobs. and when companies consider whether they're going to get into the export business or not which, again, creates opportunity here, they want to know are they going to be treated with certainty, predictability, with fairness in the marketplace. exporters need to know that the country doesn't play by the rules, that country will then face consequences. and those consequences really is what the world trade organization is all about. that's why this discussion is so important, because by today or tomorrow voting to authorize permanent normal trade relations with russia, we then can take advantage of the world trade organization rules as they relate to russia and our trade with them. russia joined the w.t.o. on august 22, and the united states was a big part of that accession we were talking for 18 years with russia to ensure they would go along with certain fair provisions on trade. we need
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8